"The American people know the economy is too weak. Too many of them are suffering. So the question for Washington is, are we going to continue to play political games and - and - or are we going to say, we can do something right now to create jobs, to put money in the pockets of the middle-class, hire construction workers, teachers, veterans?"
About this Quote
Urgency is doing the heavy lifting here, and it comes packaged as a moral test. Plouffe starts with a premise few politicians would dare contest in public: the economy is weak and people are hurting. That opening isn’t just empathy; it’s a trapdoor. If you accept the diagnosis, you’re already halfway to accepting that inaction is negligence. He then pivots to the real target: “Washington,” a convenient villain that lets him criticize opponents while sounding above the fray.
The stuttered “and - and -” matters. It’s a tell of live persuasion, but it also performs sincerity. In an era when voters increasingly read polish as dishonesty, a little verbal friction signals authenticity. The framing question - “are we going to continue to play political games” - is classic persuasion-by-shaming: it recasts policy disagreement as childishness. Nobody wants to be the person “playing games” while families “suffer.”
Then comes the shopping list: jobs, middle-class paychecks, construction workers, teachers, veterans. It’s not a policy blueprint so much as a coalition map. Construction cues “shovel-ready” infrastructure, teachers cue public-sector austerity fights, veterans cue patriotic insulation against “big government” attacks. “Put money in the pockets” uses kitchen-table language to sell stimulus without saying “stimulus,” a word already radioactive in post-recession politics.
Contextually, this is Obama-era messaging distilled: cast Republicans as obstructionists, brand action as immediate and practical, and wrap government intervention in the faces of respectable work. The subtext is blunt: if you oppose this, you’re choosing politics over people.
The stuttered “and - and -” matters. It’s a tell of live persuasion, but it also performs sincerity. In an era when voters increasingly read polish as dishonesty, a little verbal friction signals authenticity. The framing question - “are we going to continue to play political games” - is classic persuasion-by-shaming: it recasts policy disagreement as childishness. Nobody wants to be the person “playing games” while families “suffer.”
Then comes the shopping list: jobs, middle-class paychecks, construction workers, teachers, veterans. It’s not a policy blueprint so much as a coalition map. Construction cues “shovel-ready” infrastructure, teachers cue public-sector austerity fights, veterans cue patriotic insulation against “big government” attacks. “Put money in the pockets” uses kitchen-table language to sell stimulus without saying “stimulus,” a word already radioactive in post-recession politics.
Contextually, this is Obama-era messaging distilled: cast Republicans as obstructionists, brand action as immediate and practical, and wrap government intervention in the faces of respectable work. The subtext is blunt: if you oppose this, you’re choosing politics over people.
Quote Details
| Topic | Work |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by David
Add to List
